Outcomes of Residency Education: Insights Into the Professional Formation of the Physical Therapist Resident.

INTRODUCTION: The definition of excellence in physical therapy (PT) education is evolving, yet the role of postprofessional residency education remains uncertain. Arguments in favor of required residency have emerged through the re-visioning of PT education across the continuum. Yet, little evidence exists whether residency education further develops clinical skills, clinical knowledge, and clinical reasoning abilities. REVIEW OF LITERATURE: Previous studies have explored the development of the novice physical therapist in the first 2 years of practice; however, there is little evidence about the outcomes of PT residency education. Thus, this study looked to explore the development of learners through their residency education and to identify the critical elements of the teaching and learning environment in residency education. SUBJECTS: Eleven PT residency programs and 13 residents participated in a qualitative study to explore the learner development through residency. Each residency program consisted of a residency program director, one or more mentors identified by the residency program director, and at least one physical therapist resident. Semistructured interviews were conducted with program participants, and journal entries were collected from residents. METHODS: Using a purposeful sample of convenience, an exploratory, multiple-site/specialty area qualitative case study design was conducted. RESULTS: Three emerging themes were identified including growth of self, becoming a member of the community of practice, and facilitation of learning through mentoring. Through the transformative journey of residency education, there are critical elements of the learning environment supporting deep learning within the community of practice. These elements include the provision of opportunities and adequate time and space for learning to occur. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The intentional design of the community of practice through residency education facilitates the development of the novice clinician to experienced clinician in an accelerated period of time. In addition, residency graduates develop characteristics similar to adaptive learners through planned teaching and learning opportunities. Finally, the structure of residency education mattered to the resident participants such that the learning environment enhanced peer learning and the development of professional relationships.

The Role of Movement in Physical Therapist Clinical Reasoning.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore how physical therapists use movement as a component of their clinical reasoning. Additionally, this research explored whether movement as a component of clinical reasoning aligns with the proposed signature pedagogy for physical therapist education, human body as teacher. METHODS: The study utilized qualitative, descriptive methods in a multiple case studies design (each practice setting represented a different case for analysis purposes) with cross-case comparisons. Researchers conducted 8 focus groups across practice settings including acute care, inpatient neurological, outpatient orthopedics, and pediatrics. Each focus group had 4 to 6 participants. Through an iterative, interactive process of coding and discussion among all researchers, a final coding scheme was developed. RESULTS: Through exploration of the research aims, 3 themes emerged from the data. These primary themes are: (1) movement drives clinical reasoning to optimize function; (2) reasoning about movement is multisensory and embodied; and (3) reasoning about movement relies on communication. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports a description of movement as the lens used by physical therapists in clinical reasoning and the integral role of movement in clinical reasoning and in learning from and through movement of the human body while learning from clinical reasoning experiences in practice. IMPACT: As the understanding of the ways physical therapists use and learn from movement in clinical reasoning and practice continues to emerge, it is important to continue exploring ways to best make this expanded, embodied conception of clinical reasoning explicit in the education of future generations of physical therapists.

Clinical Reasoning in Physical Therapy: A Concept Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Physical therapy, along with most health professions, struggles to describe clinical reasoning, despite it being a vital skill in effective patient care. This lack of a unified conceptualization of clinical reasoning leads to variable and inconsistent teaching, assessment, and research. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to conceptualize a broad description of physical therapists' clinical reasoning grounded in the published literature and to unify understanding for future work related to teaching, assessment, and research. DESIGN/METHODS: The design included a systematic concept analysis using Rodgers' evolutionary methodology. A concept analysis is a research methodology in which a concept's characteristics and the relation between features of the concept are clarified. RESULTS: Based on findings in the literature, clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized as integrating cognitive, psychomotor, and affective skills. It is contextual in nature and involves both therapist and client perspectives. It is adaptive, iterative, and collaborative with the intended outcome being a biopsychosocial approach to patient/client management. LIMITATIONS: Although a comprehensive approach was intended, it is possible that the search methods or reduction of the literature were incomplete or key sources were mistakenly excluded. CONCLUSIONS: A description of clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized, as it currently exists in representative literature. The intent is for it to contribute to the unification of an understanding of how clinical reasoning has been conceptualized to date by practitioners, academicians, and clinical educators. Substantial work remains to further develop the concept of clinical reasoning for physical therapy, including the role of movement in our reasoning in practice.

Clinical Reasoning: Survey of Teaching Methods, Integration, and Assessment in Entry-Level Physical Therapist Academic Education.

Background: Although clinical reasoning abilities are important learning outcomes of physical therapist entry-level education, best practice standards have not been established to guide clinical reasoning curricular design and learning assessment. Objective: This research explored how clinical reasoning is currently defined, taught, and assessed in physical therapist entry-level education programs. Design: A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was administered to physical therapist program representatives. Methods: An electronic 24-question survey was distributed to the directors of 207 programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education. Descriptive statistical analysis and qualitative content analysis were performed. Post hoc demographic and wave analyses revealed no evidence of nonresponse bias. Results: A response rate of 46.4% (n=96) was achieved. All respondents reported that their programs incorporated clinical reasoning into their curricula. Only 25% of respondents reported a common definition of clinical reasoning in their programs. Most respondents (90.6%) reported that clinical reasoning was explicit in their curricula, and 94.8% indicated that multiple methods of curricular integration were used. Instructor-designed materials were most commonly used to teach clinical reasoning (83.3%). Assessment of clinical reasoning included practical examinations (99%), clinical coursework (94.8%), written examinations (87.5%), and written assignments (83.3%). Curricular integration of clinical reasoning-related self-reflection skills was reported by 91%. Limitations: A large number of incomplete surveys affected the response rate, and the program directors to whom the survey was sent may not have consulted the faculty members who were most knowledgeable about clinical reasoning in their curricula. The survey construction limited some responses and application of the results. Conclusions: Although clinical reasoning was explicitly integrated into program curricula, it was not consistently defined, taught, or assessed within or between the programs surveyed-resulting in significant variability in clinical reasoning education. These findings support the need for the development of best educational practices for clinical reasoning curricula and learning assessment.